My thoughts are that even in vanilla subs are too powerful against warships and it is worse in BJR because of difficulty in counter attacking with only immediately adjacent warships to the sub(except carrier air in range). I mean why bother with battleships when subs will do! This isn't a reflection of real sub abilities, wolfpacks didn't surge on warships like this did they?
I am taking this view partly based on my experience of World at War game which claims to model that subs were effective against transports but not much use against warships on the whole. They can do some high damage sometimes to warships but it is much less likely generally
The statistics back this argument up anyway most losses were merchants not warships
Work arounds are maybe to say that if subs attack warships they are open target as in vanilla - i.e. you can send in ships with a move to counter attack as much as you like. Or you can do 1 attack a turn by a sub on warship.
Anyway it's still a great mod on the vanilla and thanks for all the effort
Generally and BJR especially: subs v warships
Moderators: firepowerjohan, rkr1958, Happycat, Slitherine Core
-
OzHawkeye2
- Administrative Corporal - SdKfz 251/1
- Posts: 126
- Joined: Sat Jan 24, 2009 7:39 am
Tell that to the Hood, sunk by a sub at the Royal Navys home anchorage in Scapa Flow.
It wasn't so much sub effectiveness that was the problem, but more that Hitler had given construction priority to the surface fleet, and Germany entered the war with far too few of them. Even so, they very very nearly starved out the UK.
It wasn't so much sub effectiveness that was the problem, but more that Hitler had given construction priority to the surface fleet, and Germany entered the war with far too few of them. Even so, they very very nearly starved out the UK.
Do you mean the Royal Oak?
But that and Ark Royal are perhaps the exceptional examples I know of. The major loss was merchant ships
My opponent in BJR PBEM game reckons its OK because overall the game balances out with the effects of Allied growth in war effort. I suppose I have to wait and see but the point is a good one since it was air and mass of Allied (US mainly) ships that swung it in real life once US was in war
But that and Ark Royal are perhaps the exceptional examples I know of. The major loss was merchant ships
My opponent in BJR PBEM game reckons its OK because overall the game balances out with the effects of Allied growth in war effort. I suppose I have to wait and see but the point is a good one since it was air and mass of Allied (US mainly) ships that swung it in real life once US was in war
-
Peter Stauffenberg
- General - Carrier
- Posts: 4745
- Joined: Sun Jul 08, 2007 4:13 pm
- Location: Oslo, Norway
We have deliberately made a lot of changes to naval warfare in the BJR-mod. It's very hard to get this right and before we made the latest changes then the Atlantic war was virtually over in 1941-1942. Then the escorts inflicted some many losses upon the subs that the Germans couldn't afford to sustain such losses and had to keep their subs hidden all the time.
The subs make some damage against DD's and BB's in the early war so the Royal Navy is a bit vulnerable then. But to counter this you keep your naval units in an escort formation with the carrier at the center of the "box" you create. You make sure every attack hex is covered by another escort too. So if a sub decides to make a sneak attack upon an escort then you can hit the depleted sub with another escort too.
Before the Allies didn't have to bother much with naval labs because they would overwhelm the subs in 1941. Now the Allies need at least 2 naval labs to get both better ASW and better survivability for their surface ships.
Due to the Sealion threat it's a good strategy for the Allies to keep their naval units in port for most of 1940. You only send them at sea in 1939 to transport the Canadian fighter, mech and corps unit. When France is about to fall you send your ships to port. You can place the Royal Air Force at that time in Northern Ireland or the Hebrides islands to cover the ports and the area close to the disembarkation port for the convoys (Glasgow). From here the air units can attack any subs trying to attack convoys close to the ports or surface ships in port.
Since the Royal Navy is vulnerable early in the war it's a good idea to build 2 DD's and a CV as the British and maybe 3 DD's, 2 BB's and 2 CV's as the US. With upgraded tech you will inflict a lot of damage upon the subs if they decide to attack a convoy adjacent to the escorts or if they attack an escort directly.
Before the Allied player could just place a huge stack of escorts in the central Atlantic and rush to any place the subs attack a convoy to finish off the subs there. The subs had no chance to survive for long. With the latest mod changes you have to follow the convoys along the entire convoy route or they can be attacked without naval retaliation. So now you actually escort your convoys instead of waiting for the subs to attack somewhere.
After a lot of trying we've actually found a way to simulate the war of the Atlantic that actually works. The subs have a fair chance now and playtesting has shown that the subs do better if they go after unescorted convoys than directly against escorts. OK, you can sink an escort if you go against it, but if you build a proper escort box then you can counter attack with several escorts and seriously deplete the subs. DD's in 1941 and later can easily inflict 6-8 steps upon a sub so you better not attack anything adjacent to a DD.
So the Allies will need quite a bit of new DD's (5-6 new ones is good). New CV's are essential, especially in the Med. They can provide air attacks upon subs in the Atlantic and provide ground strikes upon land units in the Med. New BB's are good too because they have the best shore bombardment capability and they're quite resilient in defense. You need them to deal with the Italian navy and they're good protection for the CV's.
So I definitely not feel that there are no need for the Allies to build surface naval units in the BJR-mod. The need mostly surface naval ships. Some new subs can be good. Especially as weapons to strike Italian warships in port or to help screen the invasion transports in the Med.
Germany will need more surface naval ships if they intend to launch Sealion. Subs can't provide supply to land units so if the Germans lose their DD and BB without first capturing a port then their invasion force is doomed. If the Germans don't intend to launch Sealion they can build just subs and instead use the surface naval units in the Baltic against the Russians or stationed in the ports of Bergen and Trondheim to strike at the Murmansk convoy. Axis air units stationed in western Norway can provide air cover for these naval units. Then the Royal Navy will suffer lots of losses if they try to sink the German surface ships. Some Allied air units can be stationed in Scapa Flow air base and northern Scotland to intercept the German air units.
So I believe that if you as an Allied player struggle with subs sinking your ships then you need to put more effort into naval labs, only send your naval units out in formations or keep them at port until you have better protection. E. g. strategic bombers in the Azores, Greenland and Iceland can bombard any subs attacking. That can change the initiative to the Allies in the Atlantic. The subs can't damage these air units.
If you're faced with an Axis player building 10+ subs then you just send your naval units to port and build many strategic bombers. They can be stationed in Eastern Canada, Greenland, Iceland, Azores, Western Africa, Northern Ireland, Hebrides. With ASW tech and strategic operations tech you will inflict quite a bit of damage and the range of the bombers will increase. Germany will be weaker somewhere else if they build so many subs. You just keep your navy in reserve until more of them arrive with better tech and you've depleted enough subs. Remember that subs don't like to sail back to port every time they lose some steps.
The subs make some damage against DD's and BB's in the early war so the Royal Navy is a bit vulnerable then. But to counter this you keep your naval units in an escort formation with the carrier at the center of the "box" you create. You make sure every attack hex is covered by another escort too. So if a sub decides to make a sneak attack upon an escort then you can hit the depleted sub with another escort too.
Before the Allies didn't have to bother much with naval labs because they would overwhelm the subs in 1941. Now the Allies need at least 2 naval labs to get both better ASW and better survivability for their surface ships.
Due to the Sealion threat it's a good strategy for the Allies to keep their naval units in port for most of 1940. You only send them at sea in 1939 to transport the Canadian fighter, mech and corps unit. When France is about to fall you send your ships to port. You can place the Royal Air Force at that time in Northern Ireland or the Hebrides islands to cover the ports and the area close to the disembarkation port for the convoys (Glasgow). From here the air units can attack any subs trying to attack convoys close to the ports or surface ships in port.
Since the Royal Navy is vulnerable early in the war it's a good idea to build 2 DD's and a CV as the British and maybe 3 DD's, 2 BB's and 2 CV's as the US. With upgraded tech you will inflict a lot of damage upon the subs if they decide to attack a convoy adjacent to the escorts or if they attack an escort directly.
Before the Allied player could just place a huge stack of escorts in the central Atlantic and rush to any place the subs attack a convoy to finish off the subs there. The subs had no chance to survive for long. With the latest mod changes you have to follow the convoys along the entire convoy route or they can be attacked without naval retaliation. So now you actually escort your convoys instead of waiting for the subs to attack somewhere.
After a lot of trying we've actually found a way to simulate the war of the Atlantic that actually works. The subs have a fair chance now and playtesting has shown that the subs do better if they go after unescorted convoys than directly against escorts. OK, you can sink an escort if you go against it, but if you build a proper escort box then you can counter attack with several escorts and seriously deplete the subs. DD's in 1941 and later can easily inflict 6-8 steps upon a sub so you better not attack anything adjacent to a DD.
So the Allies will need quite a bit of new DD's (5-6 new ones is good). New CV's are essential, especially in the Med. They can provide air attacks upon subs in the Atlantic and provide ground strikes upon land units in the Med. New BB's are good too because they have the best shore bombardment capability and they're quite resilient in defense. You need them to deal with the Italian navy and they're good protection for the CV's.
So I definitely not feel that there are no need for the Allies to build surface naval units in the BJR-mod. The need mostly surface naval ships. Some new subs can be good. Especially as weapons to strike Italian warships in port or to help screen the invasion transports in the Med.
Germany will need more surface naval ships if they intend to launch Sealion. Subs can't provide supply to land units so if the Germans lose their DD and BB without first capturing a port then their invasion force is doomed. If the Germans don't intend to launch Sealion they can build just subs and instead use the surface naval units in the Baltic against the Russians or stationed in the ports of Bergen and Trondheim to strike at the Murmansk convoy. Axis air units stationed in western Norway can provide air cover for these naval units. Then the Royal Navy will suffer lots of losses if they try to sink the German surface ships. Some Allied air units can be stationed in Scapa Flow air base and northern Scotland to intercept the German air units.
So I believe that if you as an Allied player struggle with subs sinking your ships then you need to put more effort into naval labs, only send your naval units out in formations or keep them at port until you have better protection. E. g. strategic bombers in the Azores, Greenland and Iceland can bombard any subs attacking. That can change the initiative to the Allies in the Atlantic. The subs can't damage these air units.
If you're faced with an Axis player building 10+ subs then you just send your naval units to port and build many strategic bombers. They can be stationed in Eastern Canada, Greenland, Iceland, Azores, Western Africa, Northern Ireland, Hebrides. With ASW tech and strategic operations tech you will inflict quite a bit of damage and the range of the bombers will increase. Germany will be weaker somewhere else if they build so many subs. You just keep your navy in reserve until more of them arrive with better tech and you've depleted enough subs. Remember that subs don't like to sail back to port every time they lose some steps.
-
joerock22
- Captain - Heavy Cruiser
- Posts: 928
- Joined: Fri Oct 03, 2008 12:38 am
- Location: Connecticut, USA
I've played the BJR mod quite a bit, and I can tell you that subs just aren't that effective against enemy warships. Even BBs will require several subs to take down, and more often than not will inflict significant casualties on their attackers. Sub attacks after air bombardment can be very effective, but overall subs are fairly weak against surface ships. I see a lot more 2:1 or 3:2 casualty ratios than 4:1 or 5:2.
As Borger says, technology can throw the balance of power in the Atlantic in the favor of the Allies. Sub naval attack can only go up to 6, while British and American DDs can get up to 12 sub attack or higher. I really like the way the mod handles subs now. They can be a factor throughout the whole war, but they become less and less effective against enemy warships as the conflict progresses.
As Borger says, technology can throw the balance of power in the Atlantic in the favor of the Allies. Sub naval attack can only go up to 6, while British and American DDs can get up to 12 sub attack or higher. I really like the way the mod handles subs now. They can be a factor throughout the whole war, but they become less and less effective against enemy warships as the conflict progresses.
-
schwerpunkt
- Sergeant First Class - Panzer IIIL
- Posts: 367
- Joined: Fri Apr 17, 2009 12:26 am
- Location: Western Australia
I'm playing BJR (vs AI) now, and indeed subs changes are very good compared to vanilla. But IMHO and in history the subs were basically only anti-shipping and not much good else except on some exceptional cases - Scapa Flow, death blow to wounded CVs in the Pacific, etc.
And also, warships were pretty useless against subs too, the real sub killers were DD and aircraft.
My ideas would be to simulate this by several changes :
- Decreased ASW on warships, which should not be good at sub hunting
- Increased Surv and decreased Naval of early subs : the basic Type II boot were crappy, but early DD were not very effective vs sub neither, not until sonars were generalized.
- And also change spotting ranges to better simulate ships ability : CV at 6-7, BB at 4, DD at 3, subs at 2. I find it ludicrous to sight all the N Atlantic with 4 subs...They should have to hunt, they had no magical 200+ miles range radars !!
I have no real idea of how this would affect balance, but I feel it will give a still better WW2 naval experience. Comments welcome !
And also, warships were pretty useless against subs too, the real sub killers were DD and aircraft.
My ideas would be to simulate this by several changes :
- Decreased ASW on warships, which should not be good at sub hunting
- Increased Surv and decreased Naval of early subs : the basic Type II boot were crappy, but early DD were not very effective vs sub neither, not until sonars were generalized.
- And also change spotting ranges to better simulate ships ability : CV at 6-7, BB at 4, DD at 3, subs at 2. I find it ludicrous to sight all the N Atlantic with 4 subs...They should have to hunt, they had no magical 200+ miles range radars !!
I have no real idea of how this would affect balance, but I feel it will give a still better WW2 naval experience. Comments welcome !
-
schwerpunkt
- Sergeant First Class - Panzer IIIL
- Posts: 367
- Joined: Fri Apr 17, 2009 12:26 am
- Location: Western Australia
I think the sub ranges are about right. The range isnt to reflect their sonar, more like cruising around for 30 days getting the occaisional piece of intelliegnce by radio. If the spotting range was made too low, using subs to find allied shipping would be like finding a needle in a haystack given that the game engine doesnt provide for intelligence based locating of convoys.PDiFolco wrote:
My ideas would be to simulate this by several changes :
- Decreased ASW on warships, which should not be good at sub hunting
- Increased Surv and decreased Naval of early subs : the basic Type II boot were crappy, but early DD were not very effective vs sub neither, not until sonars were generalized.
- And also change spotting ranges to better simulate ships ability : CV at 6-7, BB at 4, DD at 3, subs at 2. I find it ludicrous to sight all the N Atlantic with 4 subs...They should have to hunt, they had no magical 200+ miles range radars !!
I have no real idea of how this would affect balance, but I feel it will give a still better WW2 naval experience. Comments welcome !
Hence, it might not be realistic, but, it does sort of produce the right result....
Well, in real WW2 life subs were hunting by endless search in the ocean... You can't consider they loiter around for 30 days (or even 20, a turn is 20 daysschwerpunkt wrote:I think the sub ranges are about right. The range isnt to reflect their sonar, more like cruising around for 30 days getting the occaisional piece of intelliegnce by radio. If the spotting range was made too low, using subs to find allied shipping would be like finding a needle in a haystack given that the game engine doesnt provide for intelligence based locating of convoys.PDiFolco wrote:
My ideas would be to simulate this by several changes :
- Decreased ASW on warships, which should not be good at sub hunting
- Increased Surv and decreased Naval of early subs : the basic Type II boot were crappy, but early DD were not very effective vs sub neither, not until sonars were generalized.
- And also change spotting ranges to better simulate ships ability : CV at 6-7, BB at 4, DD at 3, subs at 2. I find it ludicrous to sight all the N Atlantic with 4 subs...They should have to hunt, they had no magical 200+ miles range radars !!
I have no real idea of how this would affect balance, but I feel it will give a still better WW2 naval experience. Comments welcome !
Hence, it might not be realistic, but, it does sort of produce the right result....
if you factor that they also got 15 moves... So maybe the right balance is to give them 3-4 spotting range but decrease moves to 8-10 or so.I really dont feel "right" to have the subs acting like super-detection items as they are currently.